ArticleBMC primary care2026
Strengthening Libya's primary healthcare workforce: a replicable model for health system resilience in fragile states.
Article in BMC primary care, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundSettings characterized by significant systemic challenges face profound difficulties in building a resilient health workforce, a critical component for achieving Universal Health Coverage (UHC). In Libya, a period of prolonged instability has fragmented the primary health care (PHC) system, resulting in uncoordinated training and a workforce ill-equipped to deliver essential services. This study evaluates a multi-year initiative designed to establish a standardized, nationally-owned in-service training (IST) system to strengthen PHC capacity.
methodsA phased, multi-method intervention was implemented from 2021 to 2025. The programme comprised: (1) a national landscaping analysis using desk review and stakeholder interviews to diagnose systemic gaps; (2) collaborative development of a national IST Framework via a multi-stakeholder Technical Working Group; (3) co-creation of evidence-based training materials reviewed by a national scientific committee; and (4) implementation of a Train-the-Trainer (ToT) cascade model with supportive supervision. A programmatic evaluation was conducted using pre-post knowledge assessments and thematic analysis of qualitative feedback to measure outcomes.
resultsThe programme achieved national endorsement of a standardized 5-pillar In-Service Training (IST) Framework. A cohort of 35 Master Trainers was established (66% female), with approximately 94% of the first cohort reporting increased facilitation confidence. This network trained 613 Primary Healthcare (PHC) workers (88% female) across 12 districts. Quantitative assessment (n = 599) revealed significant knowledge gains among trainees (p < 0.001), with mean scores increasing by 29.4% in the first cascade and 33.0% in the second. Thematic analysis of qualitative feedback identified themes of improved professional collaboration, empowerment, and accountability.
conclusionThis initiative successfully established the foundation for a coherent, nationally-led In-Service Training (IST) system in a challenging setting, demonstrating a replicable model for health workforce strengthening. The significant knowledge gains and development of sustainable training infrastructure underscore that systematic planning, deep local ownership, and adaptive management are critical for building health system resilience. Future efforts should focus on longitudinal evaluation including clinical audit to assess the impact on clinical practice and patient outcomes.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.